Comments on: The Fuzzy Math of Ratings & Reviews http://www.convinceandconvert.com/web-site-analytics-and-metrics/fuzzy-math-of-ratings-reviews/ Social Media Strategy Blog Social Media Consulting Mon, 27 Jun 2011 21:18:45 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Leonard Chu http://www.convinceandconvert.com/web-site-analytics-and-metrics/fuzzy-math-of-ratings-reviews/#comment-13597 Leonard Chu Tue, 22 Dec 2009 03:39:49 +0000 http://www.convinceandconvert.com/?p=584#comment-13597 <span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">5 Stars? 10/10? 100%? The rating scale you use makes a big difference. http://bit.ly/8tYj4U</span></span> 5 Stars? 10/10? 100%? The rating scale you use makes a big difference. http://bit.ly/8tYj4U

]]> By: Leonard Chu http://www.convinceandconvert.com/web-site-analytics-and-metrics/fuzzy-math-of-ratings-reviews/#comment-32172 Leonard Chu Tue, 22 Dec 2009 03:39:49 +0000 http://www.convinceandconvert.com/?p=584#comment-32172 <span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">5 Stars? 10/10? 100%? The rating scale you use makes a big difference. http://bit.ly/8tYj4U</span></span> 5 Stars? 10/10? 100%? The rating scale you use makes a big difference. http://bit.ly/8tYj4U

]]> By: jose http://www.convinceandconvert.com/web-site-analytics-and-metrics/fuzzy-math-of-ratings-reviews/#comment-1566 jose Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:20:10 +0000 http://www.convinceandconvert.com/?p=584#comment-1566 Good read! Similarly, I find the ranking of news stories on Yahoo and news sites frustratingly imprecise. When people click the stars to rank a news item are they rating the content? The writing? The subject of the news item? It muddies the notion of quality (wrt specific news items) to be that imprecise, I think. At least with Digg and other websites, it's clearly A) you recommend this and want other people to read this or B) you don't recommend it and think it would waste people's time. <abbr><em>jose’s last blog post..<a href="http://twitter.com/jose602/statuses/1527847376" rel="nofollow">jose602: @PhoenixSuns @paigeiam is Suns superfan #1. If she's not your one & only, there will be many a sad panda.</a></abbr></em> Good read! Similarly, I find the ranking of news stories on Yahoo and news sites frustratingly imprecise. When people click the stars to rank a news item are they rating the content? The writing? The subject of the news item? It muddies the notion of quality (wrt specific news items) to be that imprecise, I think.

At least with Digg and other websites, it’s clearly A) you recommend this and want other people to read this or B) you don’t recommend it and think it would waste people’s time.

jose’s last blog post..jose602: @PhoenixSuns @paigeiam is Suns superfan #1. If she’s not your one & only, there will be many a sad panda.

]]> By: jose http://www.convinceandconvert.com/web-site-analytics-and-metrics/fuzzy-math-of-ratings-reviews/#comment-45305 jose Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:20:00 +0000 http://www.convinceandconvert.com/?p=584#comment-45305 Good read! Similarly, I find the ranking of news stories on Yahoo and news sites frustratingly imprecise. When people click the stars to rank a news item are they rating the content? The writing? The subject of the news item? It muddies the notion of quality (wrt specific news items) to be that imprecise, I think. At least with Digg and other websites, it's clearly A) you recommend this and want other people to read this or B) you don't recommend it and think it would waste people's time. <abbr><em>jose’s last blog post..<a href="http://twitter.com/jose602/statuses/1527847376" rel="nofollow">jose602: @PhoenixSuns @paigeiam is Suns superfan #1. If she's not your one & only, there will be many a sad panda.</a></em></abbr> Good read! Similarly, I find the ranking of news stories on Yahoo and news sites frustratingly imprecise. When people click the stars to rank a news item are they rating the content? The writing? The subject of the news item? It muddies the notion of quality (wrt specific news items) to be that imprecise, I think.

At least with Digg and other websites, it’s clearly A) you recommend this and want other people to read this or B) you don’t recommend it and think it would waste people’s time.

jose’s last blog post..jose602: @PhoenixSuns @paigeiam is Suns superfan #1. If she’s not your one & only, there will be many a sad panda.

]]> By: Charlie Osmond http://www.convinceandconvert.com/web-site-analytics-and-metrics/fuzzy-math-of-ratings-reviews/#comment-1545 Charlie Osmond Mon, 13 Apr 2009 19:40:57 +0000 http://www.convinceandconvert.com/?p=584#comment-1545 Interesting findings. But I think the real problems with ratings and reviews are even deeper. It is covered in more detail here: <a href="http://blog.freshnetworks.com/2009/03/the-lies-behind-online-ratings-and-reviews/" rel="nofollow">the lies behind online ratings and reviews</a> Interesting findings. But I think the real problems with ratings and reviews are even deeper. It is covered in more detail here:

the lies behind online ratings and reviews

]]> By: Charlie Osmond http://www.convinceandconvert.com/web-site-analytics-and-metrics/fuzzy-math-of-ratings-reviews/#comment-45304 Charlie Osmond Mon, 13 Apr 2009 19:40:00 +0000 http://www.convinceandconvert.com/?p=584#comment-45304 Interesting findings. But I think the real problems with ratings and reviews are even deeper. It is covered in more detail here: <a href="http://blog.freshnetworks.com/2009/03/the-lies-behind-online-ratings-and-reviews/" rel="nofollow">the lies behind online ratings and reviews</a> Interesting findings. But I think the real problems with ratings and reviews are even deeper. It is covered in more detail here:

the lies behind online ratings and reviews

]]> By: Regis Magyar http://www.convinceandconvert.com/web-site-analytics-and-metrics/fuzzy-math-of-ratings-reviews/#comment-1459 Regis Magyar Sat, 04 Apr 2009 17:16:17 +0000 http://www.convinceandconvert.com/?p=584#comment-1459 The problem with all rating scales is that the respondent is confronted with asking the question "Compared to what?" In my profesion I avoid traditional rating scales and use a paired comparison procedure in which the user is asked to compare two items at a time and simply decide if one item ie netter, worse or the same as another item. This procedure then quantitatively ranks each item in a preference listing with scores showing how much greater or less each item is relative to another item. In the current text, the user should have been asked to compare several films of the desired type of fiilms to see how the Monsters movie compared to other similat animated flicks. The problem with all rating scales is that the respondent is confronted with asking the question “Compared to what?” In my profesion I avoid traditional rating scales and use a paired comparison procedure in which the user is asked to compare two items at a time and simply decide if one item ie netter, worse or the same as another item. This procedure then quantitatively ranks each item in a preference listing with scores showing how much greater or less each item is relative to another item. In the current text, the user should have been asked to compare several films of the desired type of fiilms to see how the Monsters movie compared to other similat animated flicks.

]]> By: Regis Magyar http://www.convinceandconvert.com/web-site-analytics-and-metrics/fuzzy-math-of-ratings-reviews/#comment-45303 Regis Magyar Sat, 04 Apr 2009 17:16:00 +0000 http://www.convinceandconvert.com/?p=584#comment-45303 The problem with all rating scales is that the respondent is confronted with asking the question "Compared to what?" In my profesion I avoid traditional rating scales and use a paired comparison procedure in which the user is asked to compare two items at a time and simply decide if one item ie netter, worse or the same as another item. This procedure then quantitatively ranks each item in a preference listing with scores showing how much greater or less each item is relative to another item. In the current text, the user should have been asked to compare several films of the desired type of fiilms to see how the Monsters movie compared to other similat animated flicks. The problem with all rating scales is that the respondent is confronted with asking the question “Compared to what?” In my profesion I avoid traditional rating scales and use a paired comparison procedure in which the user is asked to compare two items at a time and simply decide if one item ie netter, worse or the same as another item. This procedure then quantitatively ranks each item in a preference listing with scores showing how much greater or less each item is relative to another item. In the current text, the user should have been asked to compare several films of the desired type of fiilms to see how the Monsters movie compared to other similat animated flicks.

]]> By: Nathan Lauffer http://www.convinceandconvert.com/web-site-analytics-and-metrics/fuzzy-math-of-ratings-reviews/#comment-13598 Nathan Lauffer Sat, 04 Apr 2009 02:41:59 +0000 http://www.convinceandconvert.com/?p=584#comment-13598 <span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">RT: @JesseNewhart: The Fuzzy Math of Ratings & Reviews: http://bit.ly/MivN by @JayBaer</span></span> RT: @JesseNewhart: The Fuzzy Math of Ratings & Reviews: http://bit.ly/MivN by @JayBaer

]]> By: John Gedeon http://www.convinceandconvert.com/web-site-analytics-and-metrics/fuzzy-math-of-ratings-reviews/#comment-13599 John Gedeon Sat, 04 Apr 2009 02:30:25 +0000 http://www.convinceandconvert.com/?p=584#comment-13599 <span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">Interesting. I like 5pts with 1/2s so 10. RT @JesseNewhart: The Fuzzy Math of Ratings & Reviews: http://bit.ly/MivN by @JayBaer</span></span> Interesting. I like 5pts with 1/2s so 10. RT @JesseNewhart: The Fuzzy Math of Ratings & Reviews: http://bit.ly/MivN by @JayBaer

]]>